The crux for me is that the main reason I have a prime sub isn't for SVoD or sports fixtures, but for same or next day delivery on physical items.
Amazon still have a long way to go when it comes to getting me to use Prime Video on a regular basis. Bar some of the original commissions, the content still isn't anywhere as good as Netflix or even Britbox and the navigation is poor.
The crux for me is that the main reason I have a prime sub isn't for SVoD or sports fixtures, but for same or next day delivery on physical items.
Amazon still have a long way to go when it comes to getting me to use Prime Video on a regular basis. Bar some of the original commissions, the content still isn't anywhere as good as Netflix or even Britbox and the navigation is poor.
Yes - the UI is appalling in user experience terms. Ironically I think it's better on an Apple TV than it is on an Amazon Fire TV... Often the only way I've found of easily getting to content on the Fire TV is to use voice search - something I never resort to on other platforms.
The crux for me is that the main reason I have a prime sub isn't for SVoD or sports fixtures, but for same or next day delivery on physical items.
Exactly, and it's bad enough people pay more than perhaps they should for standard Sky or BT Broadband to prop up the wages of Premier League players without that being extended to peoples delivery fees too.
I have to add an opposing argument, Conversely there could be others who subscribe to AZP paying the full service subscription using the delivery services little and moderately consume the video offering, they are in effect subsidising those using the delivery services. The balance is difficult to quantify.
South Africa is aminiscule market in comparison. A single provider will cost more, have cut-price pundits and poor presentation values.
Just an aside, but SuperSport's coverage of the big Champions League matches is a rebroadcast of BT Sport. Presumably it's cheaper to buy it in than produce something as polished yourself.
But Amazon's delivery model is internet streaming. They don't have any other outlet. Yes they could get a broadcast licence from Ofcom and an EPG slot on Sky, Virgin and whatever else, but that doesn't come cheap and I dare say the original agreement was web streaming only, so plonking it on Sky sort of defeats the object.
Amazon made use of BT's Box Office and red button platform so that commercial premises could watch all matches on their Sky boxes (in HD, too.) I'm not sure whether the terms of their rights deal would have allowed them to offer this to consumers too.
I have to add an opposing argument, Conversely there could be others who subscribe to AZP paying the full service subscription using the delivery services little and moderately consume the video offering, they are in effect subsidising those using the delivery services. The balance is difficult to quantify.
I just can't see how that would be? Netflix have established themselves as the leading SVoD provider in the same way Hoover used to be what everyone used to call vacuum cleaners.
Amazon have been very clever in marketing Prime by increasing the minimum spend on free delivery which is slower than Prime, then offering a monthly price (£7.99pm) for those who can't afford the £79 upfront and adding a limited selection of songs to Amazon Music, offering Prime Video inclusive (£5.99pm if you really want to sub just for the SVoD content) and other goodies.
Unlike linear brands like Sky who rely on their premium content to gain subs, Prime Video is largely a bonus to those who pay the Prime sub. I'm sure there were curious non football fans who streamed Prime Video for the first time who normally pay Amazon for Prime Delivery only. It's different to how EPL content has been used as a marketing tool previously.
Interesting how BT have gone for a more even spread of matches today with no more than three at one time.
Would also be interesting to note how all PL games being shown might have affected gates across the PL and EFL, though I suspect the Boxing Day games being on a less established platform negated the impact of them all being available.
Would also be interesting to note how all PL games being shown might have affected gates across the PL and EFL, though I suspect the Boxing Day games being on a less established platform negated the impact of them all being available.
This comes up every time the rights are renegotiated, "putting more matches on TV affects the revenue at the gates", but the stands all still look relatively full on the TV pictures anyway. Of course it's never the same watching it on TV as opposed to being at a game...
Exactly, Neil.
I'd love Amazon at the next rights round, to go to the Premier League and go "Here's £100m per season on top of what we'll bid for the packages to show the PLP produced Matchday Live Goal Rush programme every Saturday at 3pm in the UK" and see how much resistance there'd be on accepting it.
If you are a Derby County fan, if you are a Wigan Athletic fan, if you support Burton Albion, Plymouth Argyle, Wycombe Wanderers, Lincoln City or any of the other EFL clubs or teams playing in the upper levels of the lower divisions, you are going to go to those grounds because you support that team.
You are not going to stay away from your teams home game just because Sheffield United Vs Norwich is being shown on Saturday at 3pm on whichever channel may have the rights to that package of games.
To think otherwise is hysterical and childish in the extreme.
Hi am looking at getting the Fire 4K stick with voice but was wondering if it has integrated voice search for the terrestrials streaming apps and Netflix?